Re: [s-h] Re: ALSA patch for 2.5.2pre9 kernel

Takashi Iwai
2002-01-08T10:13:23Z

At Tue, 08 Jan 2002 10:52:16 +0100,
Abramo wrote:
>
> "J.A. Magallon" wrote:
> >
> > On 20020108 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > >On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, Alan Cox wrote:
> > >> > Would't it be better to split drivers:
> > >> >
> > >> > sound/core.c
> > >> > sound/alsa/alsa-core.c
> > >> > sound/alsa/drivers/alsa-emu10k.c
> > >> > sound/oss/oss-core.c
> > >> > sound/oss/drivers/oss-emu10k.c
> > >>
> > >> Thats much harder to do randomg greps on and to find stuff,than drivers
> > >> first
> > >
> > >I agree. Put drivers separately, let's not split it up more than that.
> > >
> >
> > What would you do with drivers with the same name (source code file)
> > in alsa and oss ?
> > Sound is special because you have two implementations of the same subsystem
> > living together. And eventually in a (near?) future, the oss subtree
> > will be killed and the alsa one would go up one level, just as is. Much
> > cleaner. And you will end with
> >
> > sound/alsa-core.c
> > sound/drivers/alsa-driver.c
>
> I think it's better to face this big change once and to move the OSS
> stuff now in its definitive place (where it might be removed in future).
>
> So we'd have:
> sound/
> sound/oss_native
> sound/oss_emul
> sound/synth
> sound/include
> drivers/sound/i2c
> drivers/sound/isa
> drivers/sound/pci
> drivers/sound/ppc

On the list above, to where OSS (hw specific) codes come? Into a
single directory, sound/oss_native? Or both ALSA and OSS drivers are
mixed into drivers/sound/*?
I'd like to see ALSA and OSS codes are separated into different
directories... Otherwise it's too confusing.

And how about drivers/sound/generic for generic hardware codes such as
ac97_codec.c?

> I still have some doubts about hardware specific include files:
> a) sound/include
> b) drivers/sound/{i2c,isa,pci,ppc}
> c) drivers/sound/include
>
> Currently my vote would go for b), but I see drawbacks for this solution
> (for generic chip include files, like ac97 or ak4531 ones). Perhaps it's
> better to have a mixed solution (partly b) and partly c)

Agreed. The hw specific header files should be bound with *.c code
together.

Takashi